Skip to content

docs: update release steps with version file and patch release steps - #194

Open
slashpai wants to merge 2 commits into
rhobs:mainfrom
slashpai:release-steps
Open

docs: update release steps with version file and patch release steps#194
slashpai wants to merge 2 commits into
rhobs:mainfrom
slashpai:release-steps

Conversation

@slashpai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

cc: @iNecas

Align the release guide with cut-PR practice so VERSION stays in sync with the GPG-signed tag pushed to rhobs/obs-mcp.

Signed-off-by: Jayapriya Pai <janantha@redhat.com>
@slashpai
slashpai requested a review from a team August 10, 2026 07:23
@openshift-ci
openshift-ci Bot requested a review from iNecas August 10, 2026 07:23
@openshift-ci

openshift-ci Bot commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: slashpai

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci
openshift-ci Bot requested a review from xiormeesh August 10, 2026 07:23
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@slashpai, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 12 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Organization UI (inherited)

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 9e65859a-6c78-4e70-b62d-4c40e6f844fb

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3a44b56 and 3f92878.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • RELEASE.md

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

Document release-X.Y branches, cherry-pick PRs into the release line, and tagging from that branch so patches do not pick up unrelated main commits.

Signed-off-by: Jayapriya Pai <janantha@redhat.com>
@slashpai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@iNecas could you please take a look?

Comment thread RELEASE.md
git push <fork> release-vX.Y.Z
git add CHANGELOG.md VERSION
git commit -m "chore: cut vX.Y.Z"
git push <fork> cut-vX.Y.Z

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nitpick: There is some inconsistency when referencing the remotes, <fork> vs <remote> vs <upstream-remote>. Perhaps <fork-remote> and <upstream-remote> would be probably better.

@iNecas

iNecas commented Aug 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

small nitpick, but good to go otherwise.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants